http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/yes-there-are-stupid-questions/2011/09/18/gIQA7vppfK_blog.html#pagebreak 1) I agree with the author of this article that testing is not a good measure of students' skills. Personally, I am a bad test taker and while I may have the knowledge to do well, I don't because I over think some questions or just don't understand what the question is asking because it's confusing. 2) On math tests, students should be tested on math, not how well they can interpret the question based on what they weren't taught. 3) I think students' abilities vary day-to-day and testing is not a good measure of knowledge. Good test scores may be the result of a smart student, or a lucky day. Just like bad test scores may be the result of a student that didn't understand the material, or a student that did understand, but had a really bad day. 4) I believe testing should be more essay based so students can explain their thought-process to answering the questions. Multiple choice questions, true/false, and fill-in the blanks are useful if you are testing how much the student can memorize for the test. I think if the teacher is testing for understanding, he/she should give the student an opportunity to explain their thinking. 5) I don't like multiple choice tests when two of four answer choices are correct because now the test is a trick to the students because the students may second guess themselves when they see both choices. 6) I think this author would agree with the writing of Diane Ravitch, that tests are not a true measure of students' knowledge. 7) Teachers believe they must "teach to the test," so their students do well. Although the author of this blog disagrees, I think that if the teachers taught the students so they would understand the material, the test would be no problem and the teachers don't have to "teach to the test" anymore. 8) Many outside factors can also play a role in how a student is going to do on a test--the classroom environment, the student's mood, the weather, and any distractions. It isn't all the teaching. 9) I agree with the author that the results of the tests cannot be used to get a correct idea of how proficient the student, school, state, or country is. 10) I think that standardized testing is a poor way of testing proficiency not only because the outside factors that can determine how a student does, but also because the tests are sometimes make unfairly--with more than one answer choice correct, or the wording of the question not clear.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/new-rules-for-school-reform/2011/10/03/gIQAH2wsIL_blog.html#pagebreak 1) Technology is replacing classroom tools, and I think this could be a good thing. For example, saving paper and trees! 2) I agree with the author when he said that teachers are just using the SMART board as Blackboards, when instead they should be using them for the different types of things in the classroom. 3) I agree with the author that teachers need to be more proactive in teaching. They shouldn't wait for ideas to come to them, they need to brainstorm themselves. 4) I think there are too many standardized tests and that's why many teachers only teach to the test. They get nervous that if they don't cover the test material, their students will not do well, and it'll make them look bad. They care less and less about teaching so the student's understand the material. This decreases teacher quality. 5) I think teacher's are the key to learning, not just student's teaching themselves the material. Teachers not only need to make sure the student's learn the material, but also need to boost the self-confidence of the student's because that is important at school ages. 6) The author asks a question: whether the learning aspiration is the responsibility of the learner, the teacher, or both of them working together. I think it's both of them working together because a student needs to have motivation to listen to the teacher and learn, but the teacher needs to be qualified to correctly teach the information.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/ravitch-do-parents-own-public-schools/2011/10/04/gIQAFB90KL_blog.html#pagebreak 1) I don't think the "Parent Empowerment Act was a good thing because as you may get parents that are knowledgeable about the school and teachers who will work to help it, you may also get the parents that are uninformed about the schools and teachers, who will push for bad decisions to be made. 2) The SIG and the Parent Trigger are supposed to be ways to improve schools, but they're only punishing them for low test scores. I don't think punishment will help the schools raise their test scores.
3) "Parent Revolution...an organization pretending to be representative of ordinary parents, but actually promoting a charter agenda." This organization should not exist if it not speaking for the majority of ordinary parents, but for only promoting charter schools.
4) I agree with Diane Ravitch when she said, "To me, a public school is a public trust. It doesn't belong to the students who are currently enrolled in it or their parents or to the teachers who currently teach in it. All of them are part of the school community, and that community needs to collaborate to make the school better for everyone." I think this shows that not just one person or group of people can make decisions about the school without total consent of everyone in the school community.
5) Diane Ravitch said, "It is part of the public patrimony, not an asset that can be closed or privatized by its current constituents," when she spoke of the public schools. This agrees with my previous point about how decisions should not be made for public schools without public consent. 6) As simple as this may sound, "If a school is dysfunctional, those who are in charge of the district are obliged to find out why and to do whatever they can to fix the problems," public schools have not yet done this. Diane talks about how if one person is incompetent, he/she should be removed-but that is not the case in most public schools.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/schools-gave-students-perks-based-on-test-scores/2011/10/10/gIQAwXZQbL_blog.html#pagebreak
1) I think the first sentence of this article summarizes the whole thing. "There is, apparently, no end to the way schools can misuse standardized test scores." The students who did poorly on tests were treated differently than the students that did well.
2) Inequality still exists in schools. It's unbelievable because the students that do well get perks like free admission to sporting events, and the students who door poorly have consequences like standing during lunch.
3) Even though this was a system to supposedly make students want to do better and try harder, I think it did the opposite. The students who didn't receive incentives might have rebelled against the system and wouldn't try at all instead of doing their best.
4) I think this system is discriminatory. Some people are better test takers than other people, due to text anxiety or just a bad day. Even if those students tried their best and worked as hard as they could on the standardized tests, but still did poorly, they receive no incentive. Those are the students that should be receiving an incentive (if any) because they worked harder than maybe some people that didn't study as hard, but received better grades because they were not nervous going into the test.
5) Students shouldn't need an incentive to do well in school. If they are in school, they usually want to be there and want to learn. I don't think they should have incentives because then students aren't learning to learn. They're there only for the "treat," which is wrong.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/what-happens-if-common-app-essays-exceed-500-word-limit/2011/10/20/gIQAGIwq1L_blog.html#pagebreak
1) I think the 500 word limit is a good thing on the Common App because it challenges students to say what they need to say in a confined way. The essay readers will get bored if they had to read essays from every student that are 10 pages long, so the limit works in their favor also.
2) I think the challenge is important for students to take on because it also helps them to think outside the box. They think of different ways to say something. Instead of having run-on sentences that are repetitive, the student has to focus on condensing the sentences.
3) If students submit essays that are over the 500 word limit, the Common App will not catch it, but the reader will realize this. This shows that the student could not follow directions, or thought that the directions didn't apply to him. This may be a deal breaker for some essay readers. I know that if I had to read college essays and applications, I would look for the students that followed directions thoroughly before looking at the students who could not follow directions.
4) I agree with the 500 word count limit because I like a challenge. I don't think it's a difficult rule to follow.
QUARTER TWO
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/boys-joining-girls-swim-teams-in-high-school/2011/11/27/gIQAzg8s1N_blog.html#pagebreak
1) I agree with the law in that when there are single sex sports, the opposite sex should be allowed to join. However, if there was already a boys and a girls team, but different seasons, I don't think the opposite gender should be allowed.
2) In this case, there were boys joining the girls swim team and actually beating previous records held by girls. I think this is "unfair" if the boys have their own team. If they didn't have their own team, this "girls team" should become co-ed.
3) If boys and girls are allowed to compete during the winter season, then winter is when they should compete. If girls have fall and boys have the spring season, girls should stick with swimming during the fall and boys should stick with swimming during the spring. They have the season in the middle to compete against genders.
4) It's similar for me-the girls tennis season is in the fall and the boys is in the winter. Some girls may argue that the boys get a nicer season because of weather reasons, but that doesn't mean they try out for the boys team also. We accept the fact that our season is when it is and the boys accept that theirs is when it is.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/common-core-standards-pose-dilemmas-for-early-childhood/2011/11/28/gIQAPs1X6N_blog.html#pagebreak 1) If the Common Core Standards don't include things for k-3 in developmental and psychological areas, I don't think those grade levels should be adopting the new standards. However, I agree that standards are essential to any education. If teachers and schools did not have to follow standards, I think the schools systems would be a lot less structured and there would be a lot of chaos. Some teachers may teach things that other teachers do not teach and all the students would not be on the same level when progressing from one grade to the next. 2) Some standards are said to have been set too high, but I think that high standards will give the teachers incentive to challenge their students. If teachers have higher expectations, students will work harder to reach those goals. 3) I feel that all standards should be changed at the same time. As of now, only English Language Arts and math are completed, and no social studies or science. Especially for elementary school teachers, all standards should be changed at the same time so it's an easier adjustment for the teachers because they have to teach all the subject. If only two of four are changed at once, it'll make the teacher's lives more difficult because they have to recreate lessons around two different types of standards.
http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2011/12/to-pay-for-improving-conditions-for.html
1. In order to pay for children of poverty to be able to go to school, testing should be reduced. The cost of tests is great, and by limiting the amount of tests, this allows money to be used elsewhere.
2. Reducing the amount of testing will also reduce stress levels of students and teacher. Teacher will no longer have to "teach to the test" and they can teach students for the sake of learning knowledge. This would be a "plus" for teachers. Students don't have to worry about standardized testing, and would possibly even enjoy going to school because they are learning to learn, not to pass a test that would decide whether or not they would go on the next grade.
3. Money that is saved from being spent on tests, can be spent to improve health care and nutrition. Cafeteria foods are unhealthy as it is, so extra money could be to making the food more healthy.
4. More classroom books, textbooks, and classroom supplies can be purchased with the money that would be used on tests. If testing is reduced in schools, the money can be used for useful things around the school.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/are-college-students-declaring-majors-too-early/2011/12/19/gIQAniiq5O_blog.html#pagebreak
1. The author believes it is okay to go to college undecided and let your interests guide which classes you take. I believe that if you do not know what you want to do in the future, this is a great way to explore your options.
2. The author stated that he knew a lot of people who planned on just declaring a business major in their sophomore year. He believes that this gives those students little time to explore what they might really enjoy. Declaring a business major at the end of sophomore year requires many prerequiste classes and there is little time for extras.
3. I agree with the author that it is easier to start applying for jobs and get into the workforce the sooner a student decides what they want to do and what they want to major in.
4. A problem that one could run into is declaring a major and taking the required classes, and then not being happy in the field. Declaring a major too early is bad if you're not positive because you may not enjoy it.
5. Although salary shouldn't be a major factor in what you decide to do, it is in the back of the mind of students when thinking of a career. I agree with the author in that when you choose a career, money shouldn't matter, and you should want to do it for free if it is really your passion.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/2011-best-and-worst-in-education/2011/12/21/gIQALcPdCP_blog.html
1. The author is against Obama’s views towards education. He does give credit to Obama’s administration, however, because the Secretary of Education—Arne Duncan—was in favor of Wake County’s integration plan. I don’t know why school integration is still an issue. After the numerous Supreme Court cases and civil rights, school integration should’ve been settled.
2. In Wake County, North Carolina, voters voted for a Democratic school board, which will sway the board’s decisions. The school district supported school integration.
3. The AFT proposed to raise academic achievement in a low-income community in West Virginia while the NEA announced an effort to establish a system to better train teachers and weed out ineffective ones. Obviously reducing the achievement gap in education would be a positive step in education in this country. Better training teachers and weeding out to ineffective ones may accomplish reducing the achievement gap.
4. The author says that people are too interested in demonizing teachers and the democratic representatives, instead of focusing on the real issues, such as reducing poverty and school segregation. I agree that the real issues come secondary to what people think may matter more.
http://educationnext.org/academic-value-of-non-academics/
1. With budget cuts, extracurricular activities are the first to go, unfortunately. Many sports and clubs are cut each year, leaving the participants without an activity to do right after school. I think this will lead to less productive people. Participating in clubs and sports is not only "something to do," but I think it open doors. You meet new people, learn new things, spend less time doing useless things, and end up happier.
2. It's proven that students who participate in school activities test better, have higher grades, higher test scores, and are overall smarter. I think this is true because the clubs and sports will keep the students' brains working, as opposed to 'turning to mush' while watching TV or on the computer.
3. There are so many options that finding a club or sport for everyone shouldn't be hard. What makes this a challenge is when the clubs and sports are cut, students have more of an excuse not to join. If there is no passion, why join? If students are spending their time at sporting events and after school clubs, that is less time they could be wasting doing other activities after school-and maybe some unhealthy ones included (drugs & alcohol). If students have something to do after school, I think they will have less of a desire to waste their lives away doing other things.
QUARTER THREE
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/the-difference-between-good-schools-and-effective-schools/2012/01/31/gIQAlQIlsQ_blog.html
1. The general difference between good schools and effective schools are teaching the students in a safe learning environment, and forcing children to learn to pass tests. I would rather be in a good school to learn material and content, than be in an effective school to get a good grade. While I understand grades are important for the school and the teachers, I think it is more important that the students are learning what is being taught. In effective school, little learning is going on.
2. Students in good schools are also learning things like decision making, group interaction, communication skills, and other things that are not in the content of teaching to a test. Effective school students are not learning these skills. These skills will be important later in life, and the students who did not go to a good school will be at a disadvantage.
3. Things that are taught in an effective school are quickly forgotten. Once the test is taken, the students can't remember the information because it was only taught to them to remember for a test. Children will grow more intellectually in a good school rather than an effective one. Now a school that was both good and effective would be ideal.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/you-are-so-smartwhy-did-you-become-a-teacher/2012/02/19/gIQA2vBNNR_blog.html
1. The most important reason to go into a profession of teaching is for your dedication, love, and commitment to your students. It is not only based on a passion for math or science, or whatever subject you'll end up teaching. Great teachers show commitment to each of their students.
2. Test scores are going to take over good educations. Great teachers are going to have to teach to the test, and not be able to teach to the best of their abilities because they have strict guidelines. Students need to do well on these tests to give teachers good job satisfaction with the state. This is going to lead to students knowing less about content and knowledge, and more about how to pass a test and do well on that. In the long run, what they're learning is not going to help in the future. Students need great teachers with a passion to teach, who will teach beyond teaching to the test. Those teachers are rare, and will be exceedingly hard to find in the future.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/college-admissions-when-high-school-courses-matter-most/2012/02/20/gIQA8q5AUR_blog.html
1. It is always important to be a well-rounded individual. Colleges look for students who are active in their school and community, as well as students who are book smart. Colleges usually don't want a student who focused his high school career on one thing only, and that one thing was not even school related.
2. SAT optional schools take a lot of relief off the students applying. It shows the student that there is more than just the grades going into the 'folder' on each student. Students with fairly high SAT scores may choose to submit their scores anyway, which would add to their 'folder' or 'profile' at each school, but they recognize that it's not the only thing the school is looking at.
3. According to the article, colleges search for self-motivated, self-aware students who have a passion for learning. High school courses that catch a college admissions worker's eye are those that are challenging, and that go "beyond expectations and exhibiting intellectual curiosity and character."
4. Students who show commitment to learning will have an edge compared to those who don't have the same commitment. Teachers can sometimes help instill that commitment in the students.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/why-school-should-be-funnier/2012/03/02/gIQA7OuqoR_blog.html
1. Some teachers take their job very seriously. If you can be a great teacher and be nothing but serious, fine. But something the best teachers are the ones with a laughing classroom. Cracking jokes throughout the day may not be the answer, but showing the students that you are calm, relaxed, know what you're doing, and can laugh at yourself, all while teaching is a gift. Students will have a new respect for you, and you will find that those are the moments you will remember better than anything.
2. The author stated, "As Morrison reminds us, humor also has a very positive effect on our mental and physiological states, including endorphins, creating more relaxation and ease." This will occur in both the students and the teachers. More learning will occur if everyone is at ease and not tense.
3. One drawback is that you have to show your more serious students that you are not just joking around to be liked, or to have fun. You still truly care about the education they are receiving and will help them anytime.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/teacher-job-satisfaction-plummets--survey/2012/03/02/gIQAmB5lvR_blog.html
1. Although job satisfaction is decreasing, I believe that it is only due to the increased amounts of pressure put on testing. Ever since the NCLB Act of 2001, high-stakes testing is a test not only for the students, but also to see how well the teachers are teaching.
2. I think that it is unfair to have high-stakes testing be the result of the satisfaction of teachers. There are other ways to test satisfaction-student, parent, and administrative feedback-and test scores should not be the answer.
3. While teachers do prepare students for the tests, they do so much more. They teach content above and beyond the test, but new standards are making it difficult to do so without "teaching to the test."
4. I believe that it is unfair to have job satisfaction for teachers based on something that the teacher cannot control. Some students may not take testing seriously which would affect their grade, others may suffer from testing anxiety which would affect their grade, and that leaves few who have no problems taking a test and who do well.
5. I don't think teachers get recognized enough for the work and dedication they put into their students and their careers. A lot of people take teachers for granted.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/sleep-deprivation-and-teens-walking-zombies/2012/03/10/gIQAr0QP3R_blog.html#pagebreak
1. Sleep deprivation not only affects performance in school, but it affects physical growth and brain development as well. You always hear parents and teachers saying, "get a good nights rest," or "go to bed early tonight!" Those statements could not be more true in order to succeed and perform better in school. The less sleep you get the night before, the worse you will perform in school the next day.
2. Starting high school classes later in the day would be a step in the right direction, I believe. High school students receive a lot more work than the younger grades, and they are usually the ones staying up really late to complete the work. Starting high school at a later hour than it normally starts would allow for students to get a couple extra hours of sleep, in turn allowing them to be more productive during the day.
3. Block scheduling and study halls would also be an asset to a school day. Reducing the number of classes a student must prepare for each day would be beneficial for the students. They can spend more time on things because not everything would be due the next day.
QUARTER FOUR
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/is-this-really-what-education-is-about/2012/05/19/gIQAoEf4bU_blog.html#pagebreak
1. I realize that standardized testing is important to hold teachers and school boards accountable for students' education. However, I think that there could be a different solution than testing.
2. Testing raises anxiety levels in many students, which in turn, might lead to a lower test grade than non-anxious students. Therefore, this would not be a correct display of the child's knowledge, the teacher's teaching, or the school board.
3. "...tests degrades the education experience," is an excellent quote. Teachers feel they must be teaching the material "to the test." Students learn the information for a short period of time, take a test, then soon after they forget it. They are in school and learning just to take and pass a test.
4. I think testing impedes on learning time. Testing also erodes the relationships between students and teachers, according to this article. Students are focused on passing the test, and teachers are focused on the students passing the tests.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/why-education-inequality-persists--and-how-to-fix-it/2012/05/15/gIQAXEIeSU_blog.html
1. How a student does in school is predetermined. It it not based on his or her abilities, but it is based on where the child grows up, or the socioeconomic status of his or her family. This is a sad truth because there could be many students who have a much higher potential than they can even recognize because they may not have the resources to let their knowledge shine.
2. Unfortunately, there are statistics like the following, regarding race and education. Black or Hispanic students are four times more likely to be enrolled in one of New York City's poorest performing high schools than an Asian or white, non-Hispanic student. Some students just don't have access to the higher-performing schools, and it is against their control.
3. "Districts with higher poverty rates have fewer highly educated experienced teachers and less stable teaching staff." Another factor of how a student learns may be the quality of education they receive. If the school cannot provide for quality teachers, and the student cannot transfer to a better school, this is something out of the control of the student's learning.
4. Every school should be able to deliver a fair and equal opportunity to learn for all students.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/6-common-myths-about-hazing/2011/11/15/gIQAnM06SN_blog.html
1. I think bullying and hazing has been increasing a lot recently. A lot of people don't realize what they are getting themselves into until it becomes a legal issue.
In the article, the author mentioned one school's attempt to get rid of hazing-which including canceling homecoming and all of the activities involved with it, even the football game. I think while this may teach some students a lesson, it is just depriving the other students who are not involved in the hazing activities. While lecturing students during assemblies about the impact of hazing might work to reduce it in some people, others will only think of the assembly as getting out of class.
3. While reading the myths in this article, I learned that hazing is a lot more prevalent than I thought. Found in high schools and colleges, hazing is a problem that administrators and staff have been working to fight against for some time now. I agree with all of the facts stated. I could not believe that some people actually believed some of the myths about hazing, for example: "As long as there's not malicious intent, a little hazing should be O.K." Hazing is never okay, and accidents can always happen.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/what-teachers-dont-need-but-are-getting-anyway/2012/05/16/gIQAfA8zUU_blog.html
1. Reading this article made me feel that there is still hope for future teachers. The teacher who wrote this article spoke about how he doesn't need all of the "extras" to successfully teach a class. The most powerful sentence in his article was, "I don't need standards to teach. I need students." While "racing to the top" and following the Common Core State Standards seems to be the current trend, this teacher believes that he can have a most successful classroom without having to be told what to do and how.
2. I like how he pointed out certain figures in education, for example, Arnie Duncan, Michelle Rhee, Bill Gates, and Pearson, Macmillian/McGraw-Hill, etc. He had a specific reason to back his reasoning for not needing those figures. While it may seem like "talking back" or not following "the rules" of education today, the author of this article has been teaching for 28 years, and he seems to know what works for him.
3. I believe that if teachers know how to run a successful classroom, teaching to the CCSS or teaching to the test should not be a requirement. While it may take a couple years for a teacher to be completely settled in their curriculum, he or she learns what works in his or her classroom. Standards may help a new teacher to develop his or her curriculum around it, but should not be how all teachers focus their curriculum.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/why-some-kids-cant-do-homework-and-what-teachers-should-do-about-it/2012/06/03/gJQAl3cGBV_blog.html#pagebreak
1. This article was about why some students cannot do homework, and what teachers should do about it. When students go to school, they should all expect some form of homework each day. In the case study written about in this article, the child received an 'award' for giving the most homework excuses. The child and parent were both upset at the teacher, meanwhile the teacher was just trying to end the year on a playful note. The teacher meant no harm. I think end of the year awards like this are okay, as long as they do not imply any negativity-like this one did.
2. There are many reasons why students may have trouble doing homework at home. I understand that, but I feel that the parents should be involved in their child's education, and therefore should take time out of his or her day to sit down with the child and work on homework. Homework is going to be in every student's life for their entire educational career, and students should just learn to get used to it. They should learn strategies to get through it-maybe that is taking breaks every 15 minutes, or eating a snack while working. Whatever it is, students should learn to do homework.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/the-best-thing-to-do-before-a-big-test/2012/05/31/gJQARGah5U_blog.html#pagebreak
1. Students always hear their teachers tell them to get a lot of sleep the night before a big exam. While that is good advice, students should be getting an adequate amount of sleep every night. It is scientifically proven that more sleep helps performance. Students who get an inadequate amount of sleep are actually "stupid, clumsy, stressed out, unhealthy..." and it leads to a shorter life. No one wants their life cut short because they didn't get enough sleep!
2. If you set a bedtime for yourself, it will be in your 'mental schedule' that you must be in bed by that certain time (giving yourself a full 8 hours of sleep). For students that work under pressure, this is perfect because they can tell themselves, "I have to finish this project no later than 9pm" (or whatever the bedtime they set for themselves is).
3. Most people feel that they are sleep deprived, and teachers and school do not help that. Most students like to "catch up" on their sleep over holiday breaks, however, teachers assign holiday work-which doesn't help the stress levels that students have. Increased amounts of stress may also lead to sleep deprivation.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/yes-there-are-stupid-questions/2011/09/18/gIQA7vppfK_blog.html#pagebreak
1) I agree with the author of this article that testing is not a good measure of students' skills. Personally, I am a bad test taker and while I may have the knowledge to do well, I don't because I over think some questions or just don't understand what the question is asking because it's confusing.
2) On math tests, students should be tested on math, not how well they can interpret the question based on what they weren't taught.
3) I think students' abilities vary day-to-day and testing is not a good measure of knowledge. Good test scores may be the result of a smart student, or a lucky day. Just like bad test scores may be the result of a student that didn't understand the material, or a student that did understand, but had a really bad day.
4) I believe testing should be more essay based so students can explain their thought-process to answering the questions. Multiple choice questions, true/false, and fill-in the blanks are useful if you are testing how much the student can memorize for the test. I think if the teacher is testing for understanding, he/she should give the student an opportunity to explain their thinking.
5) I don't like multiple choice tests when two of four answer choices are correct because now the test is a trick to the students because the students may second guess themselves when they see both choices.
6) I think this author would agree with the writing of Diane Ravitch, that tests are not a true measure of students' knowledge.
7) Teachers believe they must "teach to the test," so their students do well. Although the author of this blog disagrees, I think that if the teachers taught the students so they would understand the material, the test would be no problem and the teachers don't have to "teach to the test" anymore.
8) Many outside factors can also play a role in how a student is going to do on a test--the classroom environment, the student's mood, the weather, and any distractions. It isn't all the teaching.
9) I agree with the author that the results of the tests cannot be used to get a correct idea of how proficient the student, school, state, or country is.
10) I think that standardized testing is a poor way of testing proficiency not only because the outside factors that can determine how a student does, but also because the tests are sometimes make unfairly--with more than one answer choice correct, or the wording of the question not clear.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/new-rules-for-school-reform/2011/10/03/gIQAH2wsIL_blog.html#pagebreak
1) Technology is replacing classroom tools, and I think this could be a good thing. For example, saving paper and trees!
2) I agree with the author when he said that teachers are just using the SMART board as Blackboards, when instead they should be using them for the different types of things in the classroom.
3) I agree with the author that teachers need to be more proactive in teaching. They shouldn't wait for ideas to come to them, they need to brainstorm themselves.
4) I think there are too many standardized tests and that's why many teachers only teach to the test. They get nervous that if they don't cover the test material, their students will not do well, and it'll make them look bad. They care less and less about teaching so the student's understand the material. This decreases teacher quality.
5) I think teacher's are the key to learning, not just student's teaching themselves the material. Teachers not only need to make sure the student's learn the material, but also need to boost the self-confidence of the student's because that is important at school ages.
6) The author asks a question: whether the learning aspiration is the responsibility of the learner, the teacher, or both of them working together. I think it's both of them working together because a student needs to have motivation to listen to the teacher and learn, but the teacher needs to be qualified to correctly teach the information.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/ravitch-do-parents-own-public-schools/2011/10/04/gIQAFB90KL_blog.html#pagebreak
1) I don't think the "Parent Empowerment Act was a good thing because as you may get parents that are knowledgeable about the school and teachers who will work to help it, you may also get the parents that are uninformed about the schools and teachers, who will push for bad decisions to be made.
2) The SIG and the Parent Trigger are supposed to be ways to improve schools, but they're only punishing them for low test scores. I don't think punishment will help the schools raise their test scores.
3) "Parent Revolution...an organization pretending to be representative of ordinary parents, but actually promoting a charter agenda." This organization should not exist if it not speaking for the majority of ordinary parents, but for only promoting charter schools.
4) I agree with Diane Ravitch when she said, "To me, a public school is a public trust. It doesn't belong to the students who are currently enrolled in it or their parents or to the teachers who currently teach in it. All of them are part of the school community, and that community needs to collaborate to make the school better for everyone." I think this shows that not just one person or group of people can make decisions about the school without total consent of everyone in the school community.
5) Diane Ravitch said, "It is part of the public patrimony, not an asset that can be closed or privatized by its current constituents," when she spoke of the public schools. This agrees with my previous point about how decisions should not be made for public schools without public consent.
6) As simple as this may sound, "If a school is dysfunctional, those who are in charge of the district are obliged to find out why and to do whatever they can to fix the problems," public schools have not yet done this. Diane talks about how if one person is incompetent, he/she should be removed-but that is not the case in most public schools.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/schools-gave-students-perks-based-on-test-scores/2011/10/10/gIQAwXZQbL_blog.html#pagebreak
1) I think the first sentence of this article summarizes the whole thing. "There is, apparently, no end to the way schools can misuse standardized test scores." The students who did poorly on tests were treated differently than the students that did well.
2) Inequality still exists in schools. It's unbelievable because the students that do well get perks like free admission to sporting events, and the students who door poorly have consequences like standing during lunch.
3) Even though this was a system to supposedly make students want to do better and try harder, I think it did the opposite. The students who didn't receive incentives might have rebelled against the system and wouldn't try at all instead of doing their best.
4) I think this system is discriminatory. Some people are better test takers than other people, due to text anxiety or just a bad day. Even if those students tried their best and worked as hard as they could on the standardized tests, but still did poorly, they receive no incentive. Those are the students that should be receiving an incentive (if any) because they worked harder than maybe some people that didn't study as hard, but received better grades because they were not nervous going into the test.
5) Students shouldn't need an incentive to do well in school. If they are in school, they usually want to be there and want to learn. I don't think they should have incentives because then students aren't learning to learn. They're there only for the "treat," which is wrong.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/what-happens-if-common-app-essays-exceed-500-word-limit/2011/10/20/gIQAGIwq1L_blog.html#pagebreak
1) I think the 500 word limit is a good thing on the Common App because it challenges students to say what they need to say in a confined way. The essay readers will get bored if they had to read essays from every student that are 10 pages long, so the limit works in their favor also.
2) I think the challenge is important for students to take on because it also helps them to think outside the box. They think of different ways to say something. Instead of having run-on sentences that are repetitive, the student has to focus on condensing the sentences.
3) If students submit essays that are over the 500 word limit, the Common App will not catch it, but the reader will realize this. This shows that the student could not follow directions, or thought that the directions didn't apply to him. This may be a deal breaker for some essay readers. I know that if I had to read college essays and applications, I would look for the students that followed directions thoroughly before looking at the students who could not follow directions.
4) I agree with the 500 word count limit because I like a challenge. I don't think it's a difficult rule to follow.
QUARTER TWO
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/boys-joining-girls-swim-teams-in-high-school/2011/11/27/gIQAzg8s1N_blog.html#pagebreak
1) I agree with the law in that when there are single sex sports, the opposite sex should be allowed to join. However, if there was already a boys and a girls team, but different seasons, I don't think the opposite gender should be allowed.
2) In this case, there were boys joining the girls swim team and actually beating previous records held by girls. I think this is "unfair" if the boys have their own team. If they didn't have their own team, this "girls team" should become co-ed.
3) If boys and girls are allowed to compete during the winter season, then winter is when they should compete. If girls have fall and boys have the spring season, girls should stick with swimming during the fall and boys should stick with swimming during the spring. They have the season in the middle to compete against genders.
4) It's similar for me-the girls tennis season is in the fall and the boys is in the winter. Some girls may argue that the boys get a nicer season because of weather reasons, but that doesn't mean they try out for the boys team also. We accept the fact that our season is when it is and the boys accept that theirs is when it is.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/common-core-standards-pose-dilemmas-for-early-childhood/2011/11/28/gIQAPs1X6N_blog.html#pagebreak
1) If the Common Core Standards don't include things for k-3 in developmental and psychological areas, I don't think those grade levels should be adopting the new standards. However, I agree that standards are essential to any education. If teachers and schools did not have to follow standards, I think the schools systems would be a lot less structured and there would be a lot of chaos. Some teachers may teach things that other teachers do not teach and all the students would not be on the same level when progressing from one grade to the next.
2) Some standards are said to have been set too high, but I think that high standards will give the teachers incentive to challenge their students. If teachers have higher expectations, students will work harder to reach those goals.
3) I feel that all standards should be changed at the same time. As of now, only English Language Arts and math are completed, and no social studies or science. Especially for elementary school teachers, all standards should be changed at the same time so it's an easier adjustment for the teachers because they have to teach all the subject. If only two of four are changed at once, it'll make the teacher's lives more difficult because they have to recreate lessons around two different types of standards.
http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2011/12/to-pay-for-improving-conditions-for.html
1. In order to pay for children of poverty to be able to go to school, testing should be reduced. The cost of tests is great, and by limiting the amount of tests, this allows money to be used elsewhere.
2. Reducing the amount of testing will also reduce stress levels of students and teacher. Teacher will no longer have to "teach to the test" and they can teach students for the sake of learning knowledge. This would be a "plus" for teachers. Students don't have to worry about standardized testing, and would possibly even enjoy going to school because they are learning to learn, not to pass a test that would decide whether or not they would go on the next grade.
3. Money that is saved from being spent on tests, can be spent to improve health care and nutrition. Cafeteria foods are unhealthy as it is, so extra money could be to making the food more healthy.
4. More classroom books, textbooks, and classroom supplies can be purchased with the money that would be used on tests. If testing is reduced in schools, the money can be used for useful things around the school.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/are-college-students-declaring-majors-too-early/2011/12/19/gIQAniiq5O_blog.html#pagebreak
1. The author believes it is okay to go to college undecided and let your interests guide which classes you take. I believe that if you do not know what you want to do in the future, this is a great way to explore your options.
2. The author stated that he knew a lot of people who planned on just declaring a business major in their sophomore year. He believes that this gives those students little time to explore what they might really enjoy. Declaring a business major at the end of sophomore year requires many prerequiste classes and there is little time for extras.
3. I agree with the author that it is easier to start applying for jobs and get into the workforce the sooner a student decides what they want to do and what they want to major in.
4. A problem that one could run into is declaring a major and taking the required classes, and then not being happy in the field. Declaring a major too early is bad if you're not positive because you may not enjoy it.
5. Although salary shouldn't be a major factor in what you decide to do, it is in the back of the mind of students when thinking of a career. I agree with the author in that when you choose a career, money shouldn't matter, and you should want to do it for free if it is really your passion.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/2011-best-and-worst-in-education/2011/12/21/gIQALcPdCP_blog.html
1. The author is against Obama’s views towards education. He does give credit to Obama’s administration, however, because the Secretary of Education—Arne Duncan—was in favor of Wake County’s integration plan. I don’t know why school integration is still an issue. After the numerous Supreme Court cases and civil rights, school integration should’ve been settled.
2. In Wake County, North Carolina, voters voted for a Democratic school board, which will sway the board’s decisions. The school district supported school integration.
3. The AFT proposed to raise academic achievement in a low-income community in West Virginia while the NEA announced an effort to establish a system to better train teachers and weed out ineffective ones. Obviously reducing the achievement gap in education would be a positive step in education in this country. Better training teachers and weeding out to ineffective ones may accomplish reducing the achievement gap.
4. The author says that people are too interested in demonizing teachers and the democratic representatives, instead of focusing on the real issues, such as reducing poverty and school segregation. I agree that the real issues come secondary to what people think may matter more.
http://educationnext.org/academic-value-of-non-academics/
1. With budget cuts, extracurricular activities are the first to go, unfortunately. Many sports and clubs are cut each year, leaving the participants without an activity to do right after school. I think this will lead to less productive people. Participating in clubs and sports is not only "something to do," but I think it open doors. You meet new people, learn new things, spend less time doing useless things, and end up happier.
2. It's proven that students who participate in school activities test better, have higher grades, higher test scores, and are overall smarter. I think this is true because the clubs and sports will keep the students' brains working, as opposed to 'turning to mush' while watching TV or on the computer.
3. There are so many options that finding a club or sport for everyone shouldn't be hard. What makes this a challenge is when the clubs and sports are cut, students have more of an excuse not to join. If there is no passion, why join? If students are spending their time at sporting events and after school clubs, that is less time they could be wasting doing other activities after school-and maybe some unhealthy ones included (drugs & alcohol). If students have something to do after school, I think they will have less of a desire to waste their lives away doing other things.
QUARTER THREE
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/the-difference-between-good-schools-and-effective-schools/2012/01/31/gIQAlQIlsQ_blog.html
1. The general difference between good schools and effective schools are teaching the students in a safe learning environment, and forcing children to learn to pass tests. I would rather be in a good school to learn material and content, than be in an effective school to get a good grade. While I understand grades are important for the school and the teachers, I think it is more important that the students are learning what is being taught. In effective school, little learning is going on.
2. Students in good schools are also learning things like decision making, group interaction, communication skills, and other things that are not in the content of teaching to a test. Effective school students are not learning these skills. These skills will be important later in life, and the students who did not go to a good school will be at a disadvantage.
3. Things that are taught in an effective school are quickly forgotten. Once the test is taken, the students can't remember the information because it was only taught to them to remember for a test. Children will grow more intellectually in a good school rather than an effective one. Now a school that was both good and effective would be ideal.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/you-are-so-smartwhy-did-you-become-a-teacher/2012/02/19/gIQA2vBNNR_blog.html
1. The most important reason to go into a profession of teaching is for your dedication, love, and commitment to your students. It is not only based on a passion for math or science, or whatever subject you'll end up teaching. Great teachers show commitment to each of their students.
2. Test scores are going to take over good educations. Great teachers are going to have to teach to the test, and not be able to teach to the best of their abilities because they have strict guidelines. Students need to do well on these tests to give teachers good job satisfaction with the state. This is going to lead to students knowing less about content and knowledge, and more about how to pass a test and do well on that. In the long run, what they're learning is not going to help in the future. Students need great teachers with a passion to teach, who will teach beyond teaching to the test. Those teachers are rare, and will be exceedingly hard to find in the future.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/college-admissions-when-high-school-courses-matter-most/2012/02/20/gIQA8q5AUR_blog.html
1. It is always important to be a well-rounded individual. Colleges look for students who are active in their school and community, as well as students who are book smart. Colleges usually don't want a student who focused his high school career on one thing only, and that one thing was not even school related.
2. SAT optional schools take a lot of relief off the students applying. It shows the student that there is more than just the grades going into the 'folder' on each student. Students with fairly high SAT scores may choose to submit their scores anyway, which would add to their 'folder' or 'profile' at each school, but they recognize that it's not the only thing the school is looking at.
3. According to the article, colleges search for self-motivated, self-aware students who have a passion for learning. High school courses that catch a college admissions worker's eye are those that are challenging, and that go "beyond expectations and exhibiting intellectual curiosity and character."
4. Students who show commitment to learning will have an edge compared to those who don't have the same commitment. Teachers can sometimes help instill that commitment in the students.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/why-school-should-be-funnier/2012/03/02/gIQA7OuqoR_blog.html
1. Some teachers take their job very seriously. If you can be a great teacher and be nothing but serious, fine. But something the best teachers are the ones with a laughing classroom. Cracking jokes throughout the day may not be the answer, but showing the students that you are calm, relaxed, know what you're doing, and can laugh at yourself, all while teaching is a gift. Students will have a new respect for you, and you will find that those are the moments you will remember better than anything.
2. The author stated, "As Morrison reminds us, humor also has a very positive effect on our mental and physiological states, including endorphins, creating more relaxation and ease." This will occur in both the students and the teachers. More learning will occur if everyone is at ease and not tense.
3. One drawback is that you have to show your more serious students that you are not just joking around to be liked, or to have fun. You still truly care about the education they are receiving and will help them anytime.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/teacher-job-satisfaction-plummets--survey/2012/03/02/gIQAmB5lvR_blog.html
1. Although job satisfaction is decreasing, I believe that it is only due to the increased amounts of pressure put on testing. Ever since the NCLB Act of 2001, high-stakes testing is a test not only for the students, but also to see how well the teachers are teaching.
2. I think that it is unfair to have high-stakes testing be the result of the satisfaction of teachers. There are other ways to test satisfaction-student, parent, and administrative feedback-and test scores should not be the answer.
3. While teachers do prepare students for the tests, they do so much more. They teach content above and beyond the test, but new standards are making it difficult to do so without "teaching to the test."
4. I believe that it is unfair to have job satisfaction for teachers based on something that the teacher cannot control. Some students may not take testing seriously which would affect their grade, others may suffer from testing anxiety which would affect their grade, and that leaves few who have no problems taking a test and who do well.
5. I don't think teachers get recognized enough for the work and dedication they put into their students and their careers. A lot of people take teachers for granted.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/sleep-deprivation-and-teens-walking-zombies/2012/03/10/gIQAr0QP3R_blog.html#pagebreak
1. Sleep deprivation not only affects performance in school, but it affects physical growth and brain development as well. You always hear parents and teachers saying, "get a good nights rest," or "go to bed early tonight!" Those statements could not be more true in order to succeed and perform better in school. The less sleep you get the night before, the worse you will perform in school the next day.
2. Starting high school classes later in the day would be a step in the right direction, I believe. High school students receive a lot more work than the younger grades, and they are usually the ones staying up really late to complete the work. Starting high school at a later hour than it normally starts would allow for students to get a couple extra hours of sleep, in turn allowing them to be more productive during the day.
3. Block scheduling and study halls would also be an asset to a school day. Reducing the number of classes a student must prepare for each day would be beneficial for the students. They can spend more time on things because not everything would be due the next day.
QUARTER FOUR
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/is-this-really-what-education-is-about/2012/05/19/gIQAoEf4bU_blog.html#pagebreak
1. I realize that standardized testing is important to hold teachers and school boards accountable for students' education. However, I think that there could be a different solution than testing.
2. Testing raises anxiety levels in many students, which in turn, might lead to a lower test grade than non-anxious students. Therefore, this would not be a correct display of the child's knowledge, the teacher's teaching, or the school board.
3. "...tests degrades the education experience," is an excellent quote. Teachers feel they must be teaching the material "to the test." Students learn the information for a short period of time, take a test, then soon after they forget it. They are in school and learning just to take and pass a test.
4. I think testing impedes on learning time. Testing also erodes the relationships between students and teachers, according to this article. Students are focused on passing the test, and teachers are focused on the students passing the tests.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/why-education-inequality-persists--and-how-to-fix-it/2012/05/15/gIQAXEIeSU_blog.html
1. How a student does in school is predetermined. It it not based on his or her abilities, but it is based on where the child grows up, or the socioeconomic status of his or her family. This is a sad truth because there could be many students who have a much higher potential than they can even recognize because they may not have the resources to let their knowledge shine.
2. Unfortunately, there are statistics like the following, regarding race and education. Black or Hispanic students are four times more likely to be enrolled in one of New York City's poorest performing high schools than an Asian or white, non-Hispanic student. Some students just don't have access to the higher-performing schools, and it is against their control.
3. "Districts with higher poverty rates have fewer highly educated experienced teachers and less stable teaching staff." Another factor of how a student learns may be the quality of education they receive. If the school cannot provide for quality teachers, and the student cannot transfer to a better school, this is something out of the control of the student's learning.
4. Every school should be able to deliver a fair and equal opportunity to learn for all students.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/6-common-myths-about-hazing/2011/11/15/gIQAnM06SN_blog.html
1. I think bullying and hazing has been increasing a lot recently. A lot of people don't realize what they are getting themselves into until it becomes a legal issue.
In the article, the author mentioned one school's attempt to get rid of hazing-which including canceling homecoming and all of the activities involved with it, even the football game. I think while this may teach some students a lesson, it is just depriving the other students who are not involved in the hazing activities. While lecturing students during assemblies about the impact of hazing might work to reduce it in some people, others will only think of the assembly as getting out of class.
3. While reading the myths in this article, I learned that hazing is a lot more prevalent than I thought. Found in high schools and colleges, hazing is a problem that administrators and staff have been working to fight against for some time now. I agree with all of the facts stated. I could not believe that some people actually believed some of the myths about hazing, for example: "As long as there's not malicious intent, a little hazing should be O.K." Hazing is never okay, and accidents can always happen.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/what-teachers-dont-need-but-are-getting-anyway/2012/05/16/gIQAfA8zUU_blog.html
1. Reading this article made me feel that there is still hope for future teachers. The teacher who wrote this article spoke about how he doesn't need all of the "extras" to successfully teach a class. The most powerful sentence in his article was, "I don't need standards to teach. I need students." While "racing to the top" and following the Common Core State Standards seems to be the current trend, this teacher believes that he can have a most successful classroom without having to be told what to do and how.
2. I like how he pointed out certain figures in education, for example, Arnie Duncan, Michelle Rhee, Bill Gates, and Pearson, Macmillian/McGraw-Hill, etc. He had a specific reason to back his reasoning for not needing those figures. While it may seem like "talking back" or not following "the rules" of education today, the author of this article has been teaching for 28 years, and he seems to know what works for him.
3. I believe that if teachers know how to run a successful classroom, teaching to the CCSS or teaching to the test should not be a requirement. While it may take a couple years for a teacher to be completely settled in their curriculum, he or she learns what works in his or her classroom. Standards may help a new teacher to develop his or her curriculum around it, but should not be how all teachers focus their curriculum.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/why-some-kids-cant-do-homework-and-what-teachers-should-do-about-it/2012/06/03/gJQAl3cGBV_blog.html#pagebreak
1. This article was about why some students cannot do homework, and what teachers should do about it. When students go to school, they should all expect some form of homework each day. In the case study written about in this article, the child received an 'award' for giving the most homework excuses. The child and parent were both upset at the teacher, meanwhile the teacher was just trying to end the year on a playful note. The teacher meant no harm. I think end of the year awards like this are okay, as long as they do not imply any negativity-like this one did.
2. There are many reasons why students may have trouble doing homework at home. I understand that, but I feel that the parents should be involved in their child's education, and therefore should take time out of his or her day to sit down with the child and work on homework. Homework is going to be in every student's life for their entire educational career, and students should just learn to get used to it. They should learn strategies to get through it-maybe that is taking breaks every 15 minutes, or eating a snack while working. Whatever it is, students should learn to do homework.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/the-best-thing-to-do-before-a-big-test/2012/05/31/gJQARGah5U_blog.html#pagebreak
1. Students always hear their teachers tell them to get a lot of sleep the night before a big exam. While that is good advice, students should be getting an adequate amount of sleep every night. It is scientifically proven that more sleep helps performance. Students who get an inadequate amount of sleep are actually "stupid, clumsy, stressed out, unhealthy..." and it leads to a shorter life. No one wants their life cut short because they didn't get enough sleep!
2. If you set a bedtime for yourself, it will be in your 'mental schedule' that you must be in bed by that certain time (giving yourself a full 8 hours of sleep). For students that work under pressure, this is perfect because they can tell themselves, "I have to finish this project no later than 9pm" (or whatever the bedtime they set for themselves is).
3. Most people feel that they are sleep deprived, and teachers and school do not help that. Most students like to "catch up" on their sleep over holiday breaks, however, teachers assign holiday work-which doesn't help the stress levels that students have. Increased amounts of stress may also lead to sleep deprivation.